qwazse

NJ whoever referred to JASM's as being in a patrol... I don't think they are supposed to be in a patrol. Find me chapter and verse and I'll run screaming to our SM to boot those JASMs out of their respective patrols ASAP. Until then I'll quote you under my "Don't ask someone for a rule, they'll make one up for you." theory.

It's a boy scout award IMHO, it's not mentioned as an award available for cubs YHO doesn't matter. Either the official regs state the award is exclusive to troops or it does not. If you have a cub who's racked up 100 nights camping, give him the award for crying out loud! That said, I wouldn't go out of my way to punch cub camp in the troopmaster.

Apparently your son has never gone camping with me. Rain clouds save the dates months in advance of any trip I'm on! Notebooks, two zip-lock bags, some grease pencils/crayons. There, you waterproofed it. Fact is, water resitant paper is pretty cool, and Geocachers can find themselves in some serious messes. I've tried all kinds of water resistant gear. So far those zip-locks have been my best friend. I think the same applies to most geologists.

Nope, the more I think on it, with both time needed to do something and the fact you have no patrol groups to do it with, TLT just doesn't lend itself to this type of training.. [insert Kudu's management training rant here.] I'm sorry, I did not realize we were thinking TLT as an evening course. If that is the case, I would suggest the following: Assign boys to patrols as they enter the room. Direct them to their patrol table where there are the fixings (markers cloth, whatever) for making a flag. Signs up. Pledge oath law. SPL announces: you have 5 minutes to come up with a troop number for our troop. I will leave the room. When I return, I would like that number on our board. Whistle. Thank you, troop ___. You have 5 minutes to decide yell for our TLT. It must meet SM approval with no grey areas. Whistle. [practice new yell]. You now have 5 minutes to design our troop neckerchief. Whistle. SPL announces: your table has 5 minutes to choose a patrol name. I will sound a wistle, then you have 5 minutes to make a patrol flag, next wistle 5 minutes to come up with a yell. Whistle. Patrols sound off. Everyone does troop yell. SPL turns over to SM. SM steps up to speak. He points out ... In the first 15 minutes, you all came up with one troop number, one troop yell, and one troop neckerchief.In the next 15 minutes, you all came up with __ patrol names, __ patrol yells, and __ patrol yells.How were you able to multiply your productivity by __ times? You get the drift from there. Personally, if I were a student, I'd rather have spent the hour hiking. Also, I would always encourage patrol leaders to plan independent overnight outings that meet their scoutmaster's approval. Introduce them to the BSA tour planning worksheet. (Leave it to the SM to assign appropriate adult coverage.)

I support Cub scouting being coed. Not dumbing down the program or changing it for girls, then it would be Girls Scouts and that is not what most girls want. The GS in my crew rarely quit their troop. So I wouldn't expect any real bump in numbers in the general population. A good GS/brownie troop has as much draw as a good CS pack. On the other hand, when there are some CO's that only have resources for one unit, they'll pick one that can draw both sexes and have parents combine efforts. And in some cultures within our country, families insists on that sort of thing (e.g., the "sibling patrol".) That said, I don't see us mixing Jr. High girls and boys in an outdoor program anytime soon. We'd need a lot more direct-contact moms with an SM ilk for that sort of thing.

Most hikes work better in patrols. If you have a number of trails at your facility, have a morning hike that involves the whole troop. Have afternoon hikes where each patrol is assigned to a different trail. Have the boys evaluate which went faster/covered more distance.

I have known many muslims who have been blessed (their words, not mine) by Christian endeavors. One of them was a couple whose son was in cub scouts. This particular couple, having a high regard for Christians, would expect you to act, well, Christian toward their children. They understood the differences in religion, but in no way thought Allah and God were two different beings. So, don't bother changing one word in an English oath to make it "politically correct." If the boy wound up at a church service (scout Sunday, for instance), you'd make it clear that he didn't have to sing/say anything his family didn't believe was true. You might also have to explain that communion was only for believers because it was a way of saying their belief. Beyond that, no worries. [in fact I find it grating when Christian teachers refer to the "God of the Old Testament" vs. "God of the New Testament". The distinction is rather contrived.] There are other muslims who wouldn't dare darken the door of a church. Families like that probably would need a little more special attention -- letting them know up front that you would not intentionally do something to offend their sensibilities. But, I don't think that's the issue here.

"Advisor" is an incorrect generic term! Committee members and consultants are not advisors! If you used it, some MC's will feel left out. We have two choices: "Adult leaders" - okay, but could apply to folks outside BSA. "Scouters" - fits people in about where I want 'em. My point (and I think BP's) is that Venturing adult leaders do not want to be seen as distinct from Pack or Troop leaders. They may pack a little lighter, but that's about it. P.S. - "Venturians" might get confused with the folks who need 20oz of coffee-laden fluid in one sitting!

Six years ago, I would have thought BP was splitting hairs. But I've experienced committee members trying to advise, and it doesn't go well. If they took VLST, they would know that they are "consultants" (sort of like DDHII described in that 6-year-old post). MC's who act as consultants do give advise in their specialty (be it treasuring, committee chairing, etc ...) when asked. But although it makes the advisor's job easier, it doesn't make them the Advisor.(This message has been edited by qwazse)

Ditto what BP said. I have a hard enough time convincing the youth that they are Venturers in a Venturing program. They aren't going to buy that I'm anything other than a Scouter.(This message has been edited by qwazse)

Also, a wolf patch is not an end in itself. It's better to tell a boy he did not earn it, but he'll have a chance to earn bear in his next den. Who knows? For some boys the memory of not completing Wolf would be just what they need to nail down those Arrow of Light requirements.

m2c - The answer is "it depends". If a troop is planning a series of consecutively more challenging trips, then no, the scout will not be welcome on the 30 mile backpacking weekend without having conditioned himself and his gear in the previous 3 trips and made himself mentally awake in the 9 training sessions held during meetings. Doing "all the cool canoeing/kayaking/mountain climbing" comes with a price. On the other hand, if we haven't seen a boy for a while and he shows up the month before summer camp asking to go, we can probably find room for one more. Sports are like that too. If you want to be on an A team, you can't slack. The recreational leagues on the other hand won't mind if you miss a few games. The difference is most troops have both "A team" and "recreational league" scouts. With the right mix, that works pretty well. The "gung ho" boys get the opportunities they want while providing "easy camping" trips for the less trained/mature boys. So, absentee Johnny might only be going for the "recreational league" stuff. Unfortunately, some parents see it as "if Johnny's never gonna make Eagle/ go to Jambo / hike at Philmont/ shoot some rapids, what's the point?" There are some leaders like that too. IMHO, it's not a very healthy attitude.

Well, as we know, some venturers have this attitude about uniforms ... But I'm inclined to think this is a group registered as a pack and promoting itself as such. They either don't officially register the girls, or make it happen through lots of hoop jumping.

scouts does not equal school Our school bans pen knives. Our troop does not. We gave up on our cell phone ban. There are more important things to enforce. (Such as fireworks, swords, sidearms, pipe bombs, etc ...) If you want Jr. to have a cell phone, fine. But in my family, the youngns' pay for their plan. I strongly encourage our other scout families to do likewise.

Well obviously the point here is to help folks rethink what we've been doing and let us realize there's a lot of lattitude. A lot of our troop policies have to do with the way our SMs want to operate. Sometimes what the SM does is just what the previous SM did. So ideas from outside the troop are a breath of fresh air. Our JASMs do just fine as patrol members. In fact by age sixteen they're in about three "patrols" (e.g. their O/A lodge, their crew, and their troop's patrol). The point is that because of their other associations, they have an opportunity to bring unique talents to troop life. (E.g., the backpacker, EMT, life guard, scholar.) That's what makes the position privelaged. There's no counting service hours, you just see a need and tackle it. There's no board of reviews to look forward to, you just talk to a committee member about setting something up. If you think there's something cool your patrol could do, you help your PL get a solid plan to the SM. And, if you think you could do the SPL thing really well (even if you've done it before, even if you don't need it for rank advancement), you throw your hat in the ring. Now, I expect a little of that from every 16+ year old. There is no such thing as "just being a scout" at that age without showing some kind of leadership. Most of the time that results in a patch on your sleave. But if you don't want one (maybe work/school schedule get's in the way), that's fine. I'll still expect you to take charge in some way when you show up.

[sorry, double post](This message has been edited by qwazse)

Good points, Beav and BP, but more broad than what this topic can handle. We're moving from what it takes to for someone to label you "Christian," to what it takes to be accepted by God. We'd like those two to be synonymous, but I think they are two different things with a whole lot of overlap. (Of course the presupposition is that there is a God who accepts, and His acceptance actually means something tangible to human flesh -- big leaps of faith there.) There are a lot of folks who are getting by in this life with just one or the other (or neither). In the same way "head" knowlege and "muscle" belief aren't really separable even though we treat them as two different things. And, yes, if there weren't saints who put their muscle behind what they knew in their heads, the lot of us would still be waiting for that wikipedia entry on the "good news."

Scouting is actually a good place where you could tell people that, but timing and method are important so you're saying it out of humility and not putting people down. That's what campfires are for. Anyway, the fact that your are trying to work out a balance will speak loads to the mom.

Our camp goes over the plan (drills included). Our troop covers what to do (in case boys are isolated). The harsh reality: none of them would suffice in the conditions that made headlines this week. If there were a choice I'd take a ditch over an above-ground structure, but there aren't enough ditches! Time for some camp catacombs?

ALB - There is a distinct difference between my female venturers who were girl scouts and the ones who were not. The non girl-scouts have more of that "pioneering spirit" which maybe is one slice of the "male mystique". The girl-scouts have great organizational abilities and can sing around a campfire until the cows come home. So I think some of that is learned behavior. But, they both want to be respected as ladies. And I think that's where with the co-eds you see the "male mystique" kicking in. A guy who slacks around a camp full of boys might get yelled at or have his stuff yanked out of his tent in the morning. In a co-ed camp, the punishment is much more severe: he'll be shunned. The pressure to "man up and treat the ladies with respect" is a little higher.

Yes, the potty mouth is an important issue. Perhaps the only redeeming thing about situations like these is an opportunity to help a kid manage better when they are frustrated. I just had to ding a former scout for cussing on his FB status. So, this never ends. On the other hand, if I'm ever out of line, I know there are a bunch of boys who will call me on it! The other issue is: can you work with this mom? If so, have a heart-to-heart over a cup of tea. Settle differences and move on. The final issue: are you willing to give ground on the cell phone rule? (A lot of us have.) How about on the shoes? If you are, that's less "up front" stress for you. Of course when some parent is upset that an $80 piece of equipment got ruined, you have to pull out the "not my problem, next time read the what-to-bring list" line.

I have no complaints about the cub program. I think the expectation that it would feed the ranks of Boy Scouts is overstated. I also have seen that Troops do not necessarily feed the Venturing program. Some of you have pointed out that this happens because of adversarial reasons. I have noted that Troops do not feed the crew even in non-adversarial situations. At every level you need to recruit, recruit, recruit! I think my venturers really like the cubs.

You really do live in your own little world don't you. Yes, it is a pleasant one with Muslims, Jews, Bhuddist, Jains, Athiests, etc ... with whom I have honest conversations about matters of faith. We've spent some good moments trying convert each other! No you don't have to be a credentialed theologian to not believe in the resurrection, however without some kind of credentials few will take anything you say very seriously. Actually, I find if your are willing to pray for someone when they're sick, visit them when they're in prison, morn with them at the loss of a loved one, welcome them when they're a stranger, they'll take you pretty seriously. I take a theologian seriously if he/she make sense. Calling oneself a Christian and denying the resurrection of the body does not make sense. Sects or denominations occur because of the reinterpretation or misinterpretation of scripture Or because there is something intrinsic to a religion that lends itself to sectarianism. Or, because the Holy Spirit has plans that require folks to part as if it were Paul and Barnabas all over again. I have no idea which it is, but when I see great folks with seemingly identical interpretation of scripture, yet in different camps, it leads me to doubt that it's as simple as you put it. It's more stuff that's just gotta sort itself out in eternity. So even if you live a "good life" but never believe in Jesus as the son of God or in a higher being can you still be a Christian? The answer is definitely NO. Agreed. There is actually more to being called Christian than putting all your chips on one historical event, but this is the biggest piece of the puzzle.

It takes a lot of faith to believe in science. Lot's of my colleagues don't want to believe the margin of error in their measurements any more than some false prophets want to believe in their margins of error!

NJS - This thread is about what Christians believe, which is why I have not weighed in, since it's really none of my business. Since, the term was given to us by non-Christians, it's allowed to be everyone's busines. What you think, looking from the outside, is pretty important. ... mentioned members of another religion ... and what they think about what Christians believe ... I don't think we need to be singling out anybody in particular. Ok? BP referenced theologians who asserted the ressurection was mere fabrication by early church leaders. My point was, you don't have to be a highly regarded theologian to assert such a thing. But, you'd might as well not be Christian. It's true, that you could adhere to any number of religions and have that opinion, but of all those who I know who have a lot to say on the one particualar issue, they had been of Jewish faith (either by birth or conversion). Also, I was very specific with the use of the word "strident", some of my Jewish friends don't have a problem with the resurrection, some don't even have a problem with the "Son of God" title. They do have a problem that modern (i.e. anything after the 6th century) Christians suppressed the Biblical holy days and over time made the religion more Western/Imperial and less Jewish. It's really hard to reconcile that an opressor of your family could be your brother in faith. My bottom line: one good way to get an honest definition of Christianity is to listen to what folks outside the faith have to say about it. They may say good things, they may say bad. All of them help fill in the big picture. That includes -- as much as BadenP wishes it were the contrary -- this propensity for sects and factions. But the resurrection from the dead is common thread among all the views that I've heard or read about. If you don't have that, folks will stop calling you a Christian.